EE7.5 - Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]

[copyright page]

Published in:
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 1 [a compilation]
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 2 [a compilation]
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3 [a compilation]
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4 [a compilation]
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]

Notes:

this version: is the printed Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1, 2nd edition, version (obvious spelling, punctuation and typographical mistakes only may have been corrected). I.e., this is the most up-to-date version as of the present Electronic Edition.

As of the present Electronic Edition, this Second Edition of Prout in a Nutshell Volume One has not yet been released in printed form.

Prout in a Nutshell was originally published simultaneously in twenty-one parts and seven volumes, © 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991. The same material, reorganized and revised, is now being published in four volumes as the second edition. This book is Prout in a Nutshell Volume One, Second Edition.

All rights reserved by the publisher. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Second Edition edited by: Párthasárathi, Ác. Acyutánanda Avt. and Ác. Sarvátmánanda Avt.

Publisher's Note

Notes:

Prout, an acronym for “Progressive Utilization Theory”, is a comprehensive socio-economic philosophy developed by the author from the beginning of 1955 until his passing away in October 1990. The author defined Progressive Utilization Theory as the “progressive utilization of all factors”, and those who support this principle as “Proutists”.

[To see if the rest of this Publisher’s Note is now available online, click Online additional information or click the link at the bottom of this page. (If you have opened this page under Books on the home page, first reopen it under Discourses on the home page.)]

“Cosmic Attraction and Spiritual Cult”. Discourse in Hindi. Originally published in Bengali as “Brhater Ákarśań o Sádhaná” in Subháśita Saḿgraha Part 7, 1979. First English publication in Ananda Marga Ideology and Way of Life Part 8, 1988. Also published in the first editions of Prout in a Nutshell Part 11 and Volume 4, 1987. Tr. by ÁVA. Retr. for this edition by ÁVA and ÁAA.

[To see if the rest of the Sources section of the Publisher’s Note is now available online, click Online additional information or click the link at the bottom of this page. (If you have opened this page under Books on the home page, first reopen it under Discourses on the home page.)]

The Place of Sadvipras in the Samája Cakra

Published in:
Ananda Marga Philosophy in a Nutshell Part 2 [a compilation]
Discourses on Neohumanist Education [a compilation]
Idea and Ideology
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]
Supreme Expression Volume 2 [a compilation]
The Great Universe: Discourses on Society [a compilation]
Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Notes:

this version: is the printed Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 2nd edition, version (obvious spelling, punctuation and typographical mistakes only may have been corrected). I.e., this is the most up-to-date version as of the present Electronic Edition.

This discourse was formerly in Prout in a Nutshell Part 3.

In The Great Universe, the chapter “The Place of the Sadvipra in the Social Cycle” is an abridged version of this discourse.

Primitive human beings had no society and the whole set-up was individualistic. Even the concept of family was absent. Life was brute and non-intellectual. Nature was the direct abode and physical strength ruled the day. The strong enjoyed at the cost of the weak, who had to surrender before the voracity of the physical giants. However, the sense of acquisition had not developed in them, and they worked manually, and there was no intellectual exploitation in that age. Though life was brute, it was not brutal.

If shúdras be defined as those who live by manual work or service, this primary stage of nature’s brute laws could be named the Shúdra Age, because all were manual workers. The reliance on physical power gradually led a chosen few to lead the rest by the strength of their muscles. They were the leaders of the shúdras.

Simultaneously, the family developed. And the above-mentioned leadership, once based upon the superiority of muscles, passed on from the father to the son or from the mother to the daughter, partly due to the momentum of fear and power commanded, and partly because of superiority of animalic breed.

Superior strength requires the assistance of other superior strengths in the neighbourhood for all to maintain their status. Generally such superior neighbours belonged to the same parenthood or were related through matrimonial ties. Gradually the leaders by physical might started a well-knit group, and ultimately formed a class known as the kśatriyas. The age when the power to rule, or supremacy in arms, was the only material factor that mattered, was the Kśatriya Age. The leaders of the Kśatriya Age were Herculean, huge giants who depended on the supremacy of personal valour and might, making little or no use of intellect.

With the development of intellect and skill as a result of physical and psychic clash, physical strength had to lose its dignified position according to the growing intensity of intellectual demand in the kśatriya-dominated society. One had also to develop skill in the use of arms, and even for this the physical giant had to sit at the feet of some physically-common men to learn the use of arms and strategy. A reference to the mythology of any ancient culture reveals numberless instances where the hero of the day had to acquire specific knowledge from teachers. Subsequently this learning was not confined to the use of arms only but extended to other spheres, such as battle-craft, medicine and forms of organization and administration, so essential for ruling any society. Thus the dependence on superior intellect increased day by day, and in the course of time real power passed into the hands of such intellectuals. These intellectuals, as the word implies, justified their existence on intellect only, performed no labour themselves, and were parasites in the sense that they exploited the energy put in by others in society. This age of domination by intellectual parasites can be called the Vipra Age.

Even though the vipras came into the forefront by the use of their marked intellect, it is more difficult than in the case of the kśatriyas to maintain a hereditary superiority of intellect. In an effort to maintain power amongst the limited few, they actively tried and prevented others from acquiring the use of the intellect by imposing superstitions and rituals, faiths and beliefs, and even introducing irrational ideas (the caste system of Hindu society is an example) through an appeal to the sentiments of the mass (who collectively cannot be called intellectual). This was the phase of human society in the Middle Ages in the greater part of the world.

The continued exploitation by one section of society resulted in the necessity for the collection and transfer of consumable goods. Even otherwise, need was felt very badly for the transport of food and other necessities of life from surplus parts to deficit parts. Also, in the case of clan conflicts, the result of the resources of one community or class versus another gained importance. This aspect was confined not only to the producers but also to those handling the goods at various stages up to the point of consumption. These people became known as vaeshyas, and ingenuity and summed-up production began to enjoy supremacy and importance, till an age was reached when this aspect of life became the most important factor. These vaeshyas, therefore, began to enjoy a position of supremacy, and the age dominated by this class is said to be the Age of Vaeshyas.

Individualistic or laissez-faire sense develops [into] capitalism when the means of production pass into the hands of a few who are more interested in personal exploitation. At this stage it can be said that the instinct of acquisition has developed tremendously. The thirst for acquisition instigated them to [develop] the psychology of complete exploitation of the human race also, and this resulted in a class by itself. In the race for greed and acquisition not all could survive, and only a few remained to dominate the society in general and the economic set-up in particular by their capital. The great majority were either duped into believing that they would be allowed to share such resources, or were neglected and left uncared-for for want of strength and did not survive the race. Such people in society ultimately occupy the place of exploited slaves of the capitalists. They are slaves because they have no option other than to serve the capitalists as labourers to earn the means of subsistence.

We may recall the definition of shúdras as persons who live by manual work or labour hard for their livelihood. This age of capitalism is the age when the large majority of society turn into such shúdras. This develops into dejection and dissatisfaction on a large scale because of an internal clash in the mind, because the psychology of society is essentially dynamic in nature and the mind itself exists as a result of constant clash. These conditions are necessary and sufficient for labourers, whether manual or mental, to organize and stand up against the unnatural impositions in life. This may be termed “shúdra revolution”. The leaders of this revolution, also, are people physically and mentally better-equipped and more capable essentially of overthrowing the capitalistic structure by force. In other words, they are also kśatriyas. So, after a period of chaos and catastrophe, once more the same cycle – Shúdra Age to Kśatriya to Vipra, and so on – recommences.⁽¹⁾

In this cycle of civilization one age changes into another. This gradual change should be called “evolution” or kránti. The period of transition from one age to another can be said to be yuga saḿkránti – “transitional age”. One complete cycle from the Shúdra Age evolving through the other [three] ages is called parikránti.⁽²⁾

Sometimes the social cycle (samája cakra) is reversed by the application of physical or psychic force by a group of people inspired by a negative theory. Such a change is, therefore, counter-evolution – that is, against the cycle of civilization. This may be termed vikránti. But if this reversal of the social cycle takes place, due to political pressure or any other brute force, within a short span of time, the change thus brought about is prativiplava, or “counter-revolution”. It is just like the negative pratisaiṋcara of Brahma Cakra.⁽³⁾ Thus the progress and march of civilization can be represented as points of position and as the speed of approaching Puruśottama, respectively, by a collective body in Brahma Cakra.

The world is a transitory phase or changing phenomenon within the scope of the Cosmic Mind. It is going in eternal motion, and such a motion is the law of nature and the law of life. Stagnancy means death. Hence no power can check the social cycle of evolution. Any force, external or internal, can only retard or accelerate the speed of transition, but cannot prevent it from moving. Therefore progressive humanity should cast off all skeletons of the past. Human beings should go on accelerating the speed of progress for the good of humanity in general.

Those spiritual revolutionaries who work to achieve such progressive changes for human elevation on a well-thought, pre-planned basis, whether in the physical, metaphysical or spiritual sphere, by adhering to the principles of Yama and Niyama, are sadvipras.

The principles of Yama are ahiḿsá, satya, asteya, aparigraha and Brahmacarya. Ahiḿsá means not causing suffering to any harmless creature through thought, word or deed. Satya denotes action of mind or use of words with the object of helping others in the real sense. It has no relative application. Asteya means non-stealing, and this should not be confined to physical action but [extended] to the action of the mind as well. All actions have their origin in the mind, hence the correct sense of asteya is “to give up the desire of acquiring what is not rightly one’s own”. Aparigraha involves the non-acceptance of such amenities and comforts of life as are superfluous for the preservation of the physical existence. And the spirit of Brahmacarya is to experience His [the Supreme Entity’s] presence and authority in each and every physical and psychic objectivity. This occurs when the unit mind resonates with Cosmic will.

The five rules of Niyama are shaoca, santośa, tapah, svádhyáya and Iishvara prańidhána. Shaoca means purity of both physical and mental bodies. Mental purity is attained by benevolent deeds, charity, or other dutiful acts. Santośa means “contentment”. It implies accepting ungrudgingly and without a complaint the out-turn of the services rendered by one’s own physical or mental labour. Tapah means efforts to reach the goal despite such efforts being associated with physical discomforts. Svádhyáya means study of the scriptures or other books of learning and assimilating their spirit. The whole universe is guided by the Supreme Entity, and nothing that one does or can do is without His specific command. Iishvara prańidhána is an auto-suggestion of the idea that each and every unit is an instrument in the hands of the Almighty and is a mere spark of that supreme fire. Iishvara prańidhána also implies implicit faith in Him irrespective of whether one lives in momentary happiness or sorrow, prosperity or adversity.⁽⁴⁾

Only those who by their nature adhere to the above ten commands in their normal and spiritual conduct are sadvipras. Such a morally- and spiritually-equipped sadvipra has to perform a fundamental and vital duty to society.

In the cycle of social evolution, during each age before it is succeeded by another age, one particular class enjoys the position of domination and superiority. Such a class, while in political power, has every chance of exploiting the society. History has shown that this is not mere chance, but has been repeating itself. Now the duty of the sadvipra is to see that the dominating class does not take recourse to exploitation. The four classes – shúdra, the toiling class; kśatriya, the warrior class; vipra, the intellectual class; and vaeshya, the capitalist class – have remained well defined in the cycle of human civilization, and the gradual domination and decline of each class shall continue to occur in this cycle.

Life is a dynamic principle, and the movement of the samája cakra continues without any break or pause. The cycle cannot be checked, as stagnation implies death. The function of a sadvipra shall, therefore, be to see that the dominating or the ruling classes do not have any scope for exploitation. The moment one class turn into exploiters, the life of the majority becomes miserable; a few enjoy at the cost of many whose lot is only to suffer. More than that, in such a state of society both the few and the many get degenerated. The few (exploiters) degenerate themselves due to [an] excess of physical enjoyments and the many (exploited) cannot elevate themselves, because all their energy is taken up in mundane problems and all their mental waves are always tending to attain psycho-physical parallelism, thus getting day by day cruder. Hence, for the physical, mental and spiritual welfare of the administrator and the administered of the society as a whole, it is essential that no one be given any scope to exploit the rest of the society.

Sadvipras are not inactive witnesses. They are active participants to see that no person or class exploits the rest. For this they may have to resort even to physical violence, because the sadvipras will have to strike at the source of the power [of the class] which is tending to become the exploiter. In case the kśatriya class are becoming exploiters, the sadvipras may have to resort to physical force, and in an age where the intellectual or vipra class are dominating, they will have to bring about a revolution in the intellectual field. In case the vaeshyas are dominating, the sadvipras may have to contest and win elections, because the vaeshya class rules by democracy, and the democratic set-up enables them to accumulate undue gains.

(1) A period of chaos and catastrophe ends when kśatriya leadership re-emerges, signifying the start of the next Kśatriya Age. For a more detailed discussion of this process, see “The Shúdra Revolution and the Sadvipra Society” in Human Society Part 2 by the author. [In the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article, this footnote is replaced by “Also see ‘The Shúdra Revolution and the Sadvipra Society’ in Volume 2.”] –Eds.

(2) See also the definitions of parikránti in the author’s Problems of the Day, section 34, and Ánanda Sútram, Chapter 5, Sútra 7. Eds.

(3) Brahma Cakra is the Cosmic Cycle of creation. The “negative pratisaiṋcara of Brahma Cakra” refers to the devolution of human beings to animals, plants, or even matter. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(4) For further discussion on Yama and Niyama, see A Guide to Human Conduct, 1957. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

The Cosmic Brotherhood

Published in:
Ananda Marga Philosophy in a Nutshell Part 2 [a compilation]
Idea and Ideology
One Human Society [a compilation]
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]
Supreme Expression Volume 2 [a compilation]
The Great Universe: Discourses on Society [a compilation]
Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Notes:

This discourse was formerly in Prout in a Nutshell Part 3.

In The Great Universe, the chapter “The Cosmic Brotherhood” is an abridged version of this discourse, incorporating also abridged versions of the purports of Sútras 5-12 to 5-16 of “Chapter 5”.

Spirituality is not a utopian ideal but a practical philosophy which can be practised and realized in day-to-day life, however mundane it be. Spirituality stands for evolution and elevation, and not for superstition in action or pessimism. All fissiparous tendencies and group or clan philosophies which tend to create the shackles of narrow-mindedness are in no way connected with spirituality and should be discouraged. That which leads to broadness of unison alone should be accepted. Spiritual philosophy does not recognize any distinctions and differentiations unnaturally made between one human being and another, and stands for universal fraternity.

In the present environment many fissiparous tendencies are working to divide humanity into mutually-belligerent groups. Spirituality must inculcate sense in human psychology, and develop a natural affinity amongst this species of the creation. The approach of spirituality should be psychological and rational, and should offer a touching appeal to the deepest psychic sentiments of human beings. Human beings should appreciate by a rational analysis their relationship with the Cosmic Entity and recognize the most benevolent kindness of the most beloved Entity. Spirituality should lead human beings to the one Cosmic truth from which they have derived their selves,⁽¹⁾ and which is the ultimate destiny. That ultimate and absolute ideal is the Cosmic ideal – an ideal beyond the scope of time, place and person. It is the Absolute, without and beyond relativity. It stands with its own lustre for all times and for every factor of the Cosmos, may it be a human being or a less-evolved animal. The Cosmic ideal alone can be the unifying force which shall strengthen humanity to smash the bondages and abolish all narrow domestic walls of fissiparous tendencies.

All the sentiment-provoking ideas should be firmly opposed. This does not mean an attack on those sentiments, traditions and habits which are innate in human beings and which do not hamper their Cosmic development. For example, the movement for uniformity in dress for all people will be but a ridiculous and irrational approach. Different selections of dress are the result of climatic factors and corporal necessities. Moreover, dissimilarity in dress is not detrimental to world fraternity.

There will also be many zonal or regional differences as regards other traditions and customs. These should be appreciated and encouraged for the indigenous development of society. But under no circumstances should there be a compromise in principle or yielding to tendencies detrimental to the inculcation of Cosmic sentiment.

The inspiration of Cosmic sentiment will depend upon certain objective physical problems which must be solved on a collective humanitarian basis. In the relative objective sphere the following few fundamental problems must be attempted at [tackled] and solved. These are:

A common philosophy of life demands a clear conception in the human mind that the development of the human personality means an evolution in all the three spheres – physical, metaphysical or mental, and spiritual. Some objective materialist thinkers have held the opinion that spirituality is a utopian philosophy, bereft of practicalities pertaining to actual problems of life. Other thinkers conceived it as a wise and intelligent device to befool the toiling mass. But the logical analysis given above must have clarified to thoughtful readers that spirituality is the summum bonum of life in all its aspects.

Those who think dharma to be an individual’s concern conceive it in a very narrow sense. Dharma leads to Cosmic unity, inculcating in the individual mind Cosmic idealism. Religion, in the sense of dharma, is the unifying force in humanity. Moreover, spirituality provides a human being and humanity at large with that subtle and tremendous power with which no other power can be compared. Therefore, with spirituality as the base, a rational philosophy should be evolved to deal with the physical, psychological and socio-philosophical problems of the day. The complete rational theory dealing with all three phases – spiritual, mental and physical – of human development shall be a philosophy common to humanity in general. This will be evolutionary and ever-progressing. Of course, small details may vary according to the relative environment of the age.

Nationalism is fast getting out of date. Not only has national sentiment given humanity rude shocks in the world wars of the present century, but the social and cultural blending of the present age also shows the domination of cosmopolitanism in world affairs. Vested interests, however, continue to cause certain fissiparous tendencies. There are some who fear loss of their economic or political domination and are directly responsible for these detrimental or retrograde reactions.

Despite these obstacles, a social blending of humanity is in progress and needs a common constitutional structure to be evolved to cement the solidarity of the world.⁽²⁾ A world government is also very essential for exercising full control in certain spheres; for example, there should be only one world militia.

The world government should form certain autonomous units, not necessarily national (based on problems of education, food supply, flood control, public sentiment), which should look after mundane and supramundane problems. The boundaries of these units may be readjusted to suit any change in the environment – for instance, development in the techniques of communication. Development in the means of communication brings the different remote parts of the world nearer, and the world, therefore, grows smaller. With this well-developed swifter means of communication, units with bigger areas can work smoothly and efficiently.⁽³⁾

A common penal code must be evolved. Legislation must be progressive and capable of gradual adjustment with the prevalent conditions. Any theory which does not hold a parallelism with the ever-changing conditions of time, place and person, is sure to decay and be lost in oblivion. Hence, there must be a never-ending effort for amendment with a view to rectification.

Crimes are acts forbidden by the law of the government concerned, and virtue and vice (puńya and pápa) are the outcome of traditional customs. The sentiments of the lawmakers are very much influenced by the prevalent traditions and customs regarding the concept of virtue and vice of the locality or of the people concerned. The sense of crime, therefore, has a parallelism with the concept of virtue and vice. The idea of virtue and vice is different in different countries. The aspirants of world fraternity should try to lessen the difference and reduce the gap amongst cardinal, moral and human laws. All those actions which help in the growth of the spiritual, mental and physical aspects of human beings in general should come under the category of virtuous deeds, and those actions which go against humanity in its spiritual, mental and physical development must come under “vice”. This conception of virtue and vice applies commonly to humanity in general.

The availability of the minimum essentialities of life plays a vital part not only in achieving world brotherhood, but also in the development of human personality. This should be tackled on a world footing, and should be based on certain fundamental presumptions. Every human being has certain minimum requirements which he or she must be guaranteed. Guaranteed availability of foodstuff, clothing, medical assistance and housing accommodation should be arranged so that human beings may be able to utilize their surplus energy (energy up till now engaged in procuring the essentialities of life) in subtler pursuits. Side by side, there should be sufficient scope for providing other amenities of the progressive age. To fulfil the above responsibilities, enough purchasing capacity should be created.

If the supply of requirements be guaranteed without any conditions of personal skill and labour, the individual may develop the psychology of idleness. The minimum requirements of every person are the same, but diversity is also the nature of creation. Special amenities should, therefore, be provided so that the diversity in skill and intelligence is fully utilized, and talent is encouraged to contribute its best towards human development. It will, therefore, be necessary to make provision for special emoluments which can cater for special amenities of life according to the age and time. But at the same time, there should be a constant effort to reduce the gap between the amount of special emoluments and the bare minimum requirements of the average individual. The guaranteed supply of minimum requirements must be liberalized by increasing the provision of special amenities pertaining to the age and also, simultaneously, by bringing about a decrease in the provision of special emoluments given to the few. This never-ending effort of proper economic adjustment must ceaselessly continue at all times with a view to assisting the spiritual, mental and physical evolution of human beings, and to let humanity develop a Cosmic sentiment for a Cosmic ideal and world fraternity.⁽⁴⁾

In this socio-economic set-up people are at full liberty in the spiritual and mental spheres. This is possible because the spiritual and psychic entities for which people can aspire are themselves unlimited, and the extent of possession in this sphere does not hamper the progress of others in their quests. But the supply in the physical sphere is limited, and hence any effort for disproportionate or unrestricted acquisition of physical objects has every possibility of creating a vast majority of have-not’s, and thus hampering the spiritual, mental and physical growth of the larger majority. So, while dealing with the problem of individual liberty, it must be kept in view that individual liberty in the physical sphere must not be allowed to cross a limit whereat it is instrumental in hampering the development of the complete personality of human beings; and, at the same time, must not be so drastically curtailed that the spiritual, mental and physical growths of human beings are hampered.

Thus, the social philosophy of Ananda Marga advocates the development of the integrated personality of the individual, and also the establishment of world fraternity, inculcating in human psychology a Cosmic sentiment. The Marga advocates progressive utilization of mundane and supramundane factors of the Cosmos. The society needs a stir for life, vigour and progress, and for this Ananda Marga advocates the Progressive Utilization Theory (Prout), meaning thereby progressive utilization of all factors. Those who support this principle may be termed “Proutists”.

(1) Unit selves, or jiivátmans, are derived from the Cosmic Self. See “Pratisaiṋcara and Manah” for a discussion of the reunion of the two. [In the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article, this footnote is replaced by “Unit selves, or jiivátmans, are derived from the Cosmic Self. For further discussion on this concept, see ‘Pratisaiṋcara and Manah’ and ‘Átman, Paramátman and Sadhana’ in Idea and Ideology, 1959.”] –Eds.

(2) For further discussion on a global constitution, see “Requirements of an Ideal Constitution” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(3) For further discussion on socio-economic units, see “Socio-Economic Groupifications” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(4) For further discussion on minimum requirements and special amenities, see “Minimum Requirements and Maximum Amenities” in Volume 4. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(5) These principles, named the “Five Fundamental Principles of Prout” by the author, were added to the first edition of Idea and Ideology as it was being printed during November 1959. However, since the author included them as part of this discourse, “The Cosmic Brotherhood”, which was given on 5 June 1959, they are dated accordingly. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

The Vital Energy of Students

Published in:
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]

Notes:

this version: is the printed Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 2nd edition, version (obvious spelling, punctuation and typographical mistakes only may have been corrected). I.e., this is the most up-to-date version as of the present Electronic Edition.

This discourse was delivered to a meeting of students and youths. On the following day, 15 September 1959, in Motihari, the author founded the Universal Proutist Students’ Federation (UPSF).

Normally between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four human beings have abundant práńa shakti [vital energy]. This is the period of their student life. Though there is plenty of vital energy during this period, due to intellectual underdevelopment the physical and intellectual waves are unable to adjust together properly. Hence those with a developed intellect, cunning political leaders, cast a net of high-sounding, illusory theories and exploit the vital energy of students to achieve their selfish political goals. Because of their underdeveloped intellect, the student community remains unaware of such exploitation.

In democratic countries the mundane goal of party leaders is merely to obtain ministerial posts. To achieve this they propagate so-called ideologies which attract students, and thus they utilize the vital energy of students to fulfil their selfish aims.

The question is, how should the vital energy of students be utilized? With the first stir in the vital energy an extraordinary state occurs, and it becomes difficult to judge what to do and what not to do. Cunning people mobilize students in such a state to achieve their objectives.

Students have vibrant vital energy. If it is not used for constructive activities, it is bound to become engaged in destructive works. Vital energy cannot sit idle. When students do not have any constructive plans before them, they get deceived by the illusions created by such selfish opportunitsts and feel a misplaced pride in allowing themselves to serve as their instruments.

The ideal of human beings is not to extrovert but to introvert the vital energy. In the process of introverting the vital energy, adjustment between the vital energy and the intellectual wave brings progress in a proper direction. Improper use of the extroversial momentum will certainly engage the vital energy in destructive activities.

When pondering the history of the student community in India, we find that the vital energy of students in pre-independence India has mostly been properly utilized. Before the nineteenth century education in this country was personal, whether in catuśpát́hiis [Vedic schools] through the medium of Sanskrit, or in maktabas [Muslim schools] through the medium of Urdu or Persian. It had not attained a social dimension at that time. There were students, but there was no student community. After the middle of the nineteenth century, due to the use of the English language and India’s contact with westerners, gradually a class of students emerged in India. A class feeling developed in the students when thousands of them came in contact with English education. Political consciousness among Indian students is a direct and beneficial result of English education.

At the beginning of the independence struggle, senior students used to guide and instruct the juniors.

During the twentieth century the student community discovered a meaningful slogan in the fight for independence, and a way to utilize their vital energy. This movement was not non-violent. The very character of vital energy is to wage a war against opposing forces. By fighting against opposing forces, the vital energy creates a resultant. It can never be non-violent. To be non-violent one would have to avoid clash. Non-violence is against dharma, hence it is against reason too. It may serve a pretentious policy, but it cannot be a principle.

The first quarter of the twentieth century was a period of direct clash where the vital energy of the students was fully utilized. That was appropriate for chátras. Chátra does not mean “students”; chátra means “jurisdiction”. People living within the jurisdiction of a particular teacher used to receive and to follow guidance from that teacher, hence they were called his or her chátras. These days students and professors in colleges differ in their opinions, hence the students are not chátras in the real sense of the term.

When the vital energy of youths does not find scope for expression within the prevalent system, it starts waging a war against that system. According to this principle, the youths’ fight for independence was certainly justified.

After the first quarter of the twentieth century, the faint light of independence became visible. Those leaders who understood the implications of the initial struggle started to calculate the possibility of gaining power after independence, which they considered to be their right. Power politics started with speculation about who would hold higher ministerial posts and who would hold lower posts. Although the struggle itself was highly justified, the power politics was completely unjustified.

Chátras who become involved in power politics spoil their careers and lives while working to install a person or a group in ministerial office. This has become more evident since independence. Joining party politics today means destroying oneself for political leaders. Hence, this is not a proper direction for students.

Chátras will have to adopt a natural course for the expression of their vital energy. The immorality which permeates social life certainly hinders the natural growth of chátras’ vital energy. Hence spirited students should be zealous and ever-ready to wage war against economic injustice, immorality and corruption, whatever the type, which causes shortages of clothing, the adulteration of foodstuffs, etc. This is the way to properly utilize their vital energy.

A particular political party opposes the misconduct and corruption of the ruling party, but it becomes involved in the same activities when it attains power. Favouring a party implies linking oneself with the inherent defects and the mistakes of that party, which is not proper.

The proper use of vital energy lies in fighting against injustice. The ruling British class obstructed the natural growth of the psychic propensities of a particular group, hence it was proper for the chátras to fight and gain independence.

In the changed circumstances of today, chátras should remain alert and guard against the exploitation of their vital energy. They should carefully judge whether they are opposing immorality and corruption, or whether they are joining forces with a particular party. If their vital energy is being utilized to fight against immorality, it is proper.

Chátras may have various student organizations, but the purpose should be to create movements which do not favour any party or ism. One of the students should be the leader so that external leaders from political parties do not get the opportunity to exploit them. Let non-party persons be student leaders.

Discourses on Prout

Published in:
Discourses on Prout
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]

Notes:

Each of the six discourses in this chapter was given on consecutive days from 17 October to 22 October 1959, in Jamalpur, at the First Conference of Proutists. –Eds.

This discourse was formerly in Prout in a Nutshell Part 4.

The universe is the psychic and internal projection of Cosmic Consciousness, and ours is a reflected projection. We cannot create anything original. Whatever we do, we do with the physical waves radiated from matter. We can [only] change their form and create chemical compounds or physical mixtures. Thus ours is a physico-psychic or extro-internal projection.

Rudimental factors cannot be created by human beings, hence ownership lies with the Cosmic Entity and not with individuals. We can only use these factors. We are like the members of a joint family under the Dáyabhága⁽¹⁾ system of law sermonized by Shrii Jiimutabahana Bhattacharya.

This universe is our common patrimony. Ours is a universal joint family, Parama Puruśa [Cosmic Consciousness] being Supreme Father.⁽²⁾ Like members of a joint family, we should live with the policy of “Live and let others live.” The exploited and unexploited potentialities of the world do not belong to any particular person, nation or state. They can only enjoy these potentialities. We are to utilize all the mundane and supramundane wealth accepting the principle of Cosmic inheritance. This is our social dharma. It is not only our social dharma, but the logical and rational approach too. This is the correct social philosophy.

There are infinite semblances of relativity in the universal arena. Hence no governmental order or law of inheritance can be treated as perfect because they are embedded in relativity. If we are to build a perfect order in the mundane and supramundane spheres, we will have to depend upon something absolute. The universe, which is a psychic projection of the Cosmic Mind, is a creation of relativity, but ownership lies with the Macrocosm. For a perfect socio-political order, there should be a happy blending of relativity and absolute.

If we accept the rational principles of Cosmic inheritance, the question of foreign and native lands does not arise. The whole universe is our paternal property, and we are the members of the Cosmic society. We are free to move and settle anywhere and everywhere we like.

There is infinite thirst in the microcosm, and as such this thirst cannot be quenched by acquiring physical wealth. Our mental longings are trifarious – that is, physical, psychic and spiritual. The microcosm tries to fulfil its infinite physical hunger through physical resources which, though very big, are finite. Hence the infinite physical thirst will remain unquenched forever, even if the microcosm becomes the master of the whole planetary world. Therefore it is necessary to divert the physical thirst (which is infinite) towards psychic and spiritual pursuits. Among these three strata the psychic and spiritual worlds are infinite, so there will be no clash or exploitation in quenching the thirsts in these spheres. Otherwise the unsatisfied physical desires will remain in [potential] form, gradually acquire momentum, and finally revolt.

Human thirsts are trifarious. Ananda Marga wants to divert the unquenchable physical thirst towards psychic and spiritual pursuits. The duty of Renaissance Universal⁽³⁾ is to make intellectual appeals, and the work of the Proutists⁽⁴⁾ is to see whether law and order is strictly enforced or not. If it is not enforced strictly or if it goes against the principles of Yama and Niyama,⁽⁵⁾ enforcement is to be done by creating pressure of circumstances.

There should be rational acquisition and rational distribution of mundane property, otherwise the peace and tranquillity of society will be disturbed. The per capita limit of acquisition should be fixed according to the collective resources of the universal society.

To materialize the ideals of rational acquisition and rational distribution of mundane resources, our first approach will be spiritual, followed by psychic. Where even the psychic approach fails, the application of force⁽⁶⁾ would also be supported for the greater interest of the society. Those who are trying to avoid this fight are shirking their human responsibility.

Human progress is always resultant progress. The speed of progress will go on accelerating by clash and cohesion. The application of force is the essence of life the rudimental factor, the spirit of life. Those who speak against the application of force are hypocrites. Lack of the application of force means death. The necessity of the application of force is always felt by us at every hour, at every moment. Non-application of force is of no value in either the physical world or the psychic world, or even in the spiritual world. Non-application of force is a bogus ism.

The universe is the projected psychic objectivity of the Macrocosm. Everything is owned by the Cosmic Entity. We are to use [the resources in] the universe; ownership lies with the Supreme Father. The owners of land are neither the tenants nor the zamindars [landlords]. The wrong and illogical propagation that ownership lies with the toiling people only gives rise to conflict and chaos. Accepting the principles of Cosmic inheritance, we are to utilize [the resources in] the universe to the best of our capability.

The zamindars should not be given any compensation for the socialization of land. Rationality demands that if the owner is a widow, an old man or a minor boy, they should be given stipends, and unemployed youths should be provided with jobs. Small zamindars having no other resources for their livelihood should be awarded stipends. As a matter of principle the system of compensation cannot be accepted.

The mind requires a psychic shelter. Our feelings are nothing but its shelter and are physico-psychic projections. Spiritual sádhaná⁽⁷⁾ increases the boundaries of projected objects. The angle depends upon the volume of the projected mass – that is, the arena of projection.

The caste system is a creation of the cunning intellectuals of the Medieval Age. In the Vipra Era they wanted to perpetuate their privileged position for their descendants. To achieve this end, those cunning intellectuals wrote thousands of books and compiled thousands of God-centred verses only to show that the caste system is a creation of God. This was a psychological way of infusing the illogical idea [of casteism].

Those thinking of the upliftment of the Bundela Rajputs will think of the welfare of the entire Rajput society if their mental arena is increased as a result of sádhaná. With the further expansion of their mental object, they will feel proud to be Hindus, then Biharis, then Indians, and finally members of the whole universe. After rational and synthetic deep thinking, they will identify themselves with every particle of the universe, which will result in the feeling of oneness with the Cosmic Entity. This is the stage of savikalpa samádhi [qualified Cosmic absorption].

So, every feeling less than that of universal projection is bad. To propagate nationalism is a mental disease like casteism, provincialism, etc. The panacea for all [such] diseases is universalism – that is, 360-degree projection. People may say that the angle of nationalism is bigger than that of provincialism or casteism, but in fact the degree depends upon the volume of the projected mass. For example, Pakistan has less population than the Hindu population of India, so the angle of Hindu communalism is greater than the angle of Pakistani nationalism. The population of Swiss nationals is less than the population of Bengal; here provincialism is better than nationalism. The population of Nepal is less than the Rajput population in India; here the angle of casteism is bigger than that of Nepalese nationalism. We must not support any of them.

Universalism does not depend upon any relative factor, hence it is free from the vices of ism. Ism thrives on the angle of group interest. Among many other factors, ism is a major factor in war. War is not an ideological clash. Those who are eager to establish peace should shake off nationalism and other allied isms.

If we are to shake off these isms, we have to organize a universal body and go on strengthening its power. This will be the first phase in establishing a world government. In the initial stage it will be a law-framing body. The first beneficial effect of such a body will be that no country will be allowed to frame laws detrimental to the interests of its minorities. The right to execute those laws will be vested with the local government and not with the world government. The world government will decide the principles on the basis of which a particular law will be enforced in a particular country.

There will be two houses: a lower house and an upper house. In the lower house, representatives will be sent according to the population of the country. In the upper house, representatives will be sent country-wise. First bills will be placed before the lower house, and before their final acceptance they will be duly discussed in the upper house. Small countries which cannot send a single representative to the lower house will have the opportunity to discuss the merits and demerits of proposed acts with other countries in the upper house.

Human beings are rapidly conquering space and time. The boundary of the world government will go on increasing, and one day it may extend throughout the entire planetary world. One language – that is, the common vishva bháśá [universal language] – is a necessary device for the exchange of ideas among different linguistic groups. Today the English language has all the qualities to be the vishva bháśá, but this is subject to change according to changes in time.

For the common vishva bháśá, a highly scientific script is required. Nowadays Roman script is the most scientific script. Local scripts should also be recognized for local languages. Both Roman script and local scripts should thrive side by side.

There should not be any prescribed national or international dress. Selection of dress depends upon the climatic conditions of a particular place. There should be complete freedom in the choice of dress.

Culture is an ambiguous term. It is a collective expression of social life and is of composite structure. The Sanskrit words for culture are saḿskrti and krśt́i. Saḿskrti is used in a good sense and krśt́i in a general sense. There are certain prima facie local variations, but there is no difference in the subterranean cultural flow of the human society. The difference is external and not internal. Culture is one for the entire world. Common factors for the entire humanity (that is, culture in the true sense of the term) should always be encouraged, but prima facie differences should never be encouraged. Those who encourage these differences help the fissiparous tendencies which endanger human progress. To establish a cosmopolitan cultural outlook, we have to wipe out prima facie differences through matrimony and other socio-economic blendings.

Nationalism is being rapidly replaced by internationalism. A day is sure to come when this international colour will be changed into universalism. The feeling of nationalism will [then] lie dormant within the scope of internationalism. For a better social structure, humanity is sure to give up all filthy ideas of caste, [religious] community, nationality, etc.

As the psychic projection [of human beings] goes on increasing, the world is becoming smaller and smaller. A day is sure to come when human thirst, not being quenched by the fulfilment of natural urges, will require a broader field of mental vision. A new, universalistic human race is sure to evolve. For this, we want a common language (medium of interlingual expression) for the entire human race.

While fighting corruption there should be a constructive ideal. Different civic movements in India have failed to give benevolent service because they lacked a constructive ideal. They fought only for the sake of fight. Therefore it is necessary that the ideal should be first, the ideal second and the ideal always.

Those who lack a constructive ideal help the capitalists in their exploitation. Only criticizing capitalism will not be of any service to the people, rather it will help the antisocial elements to find or invent more tactics for exploitation. This is the condition in India today. The leftist groups are engaged in criticizing the capitalists, which is bearing no fruitful results, and the capitalists have captured power by influencing the ruling party.

Our approach should be to adopt a constructive ideal, and we should wage a ceaseless and pactless struggle against all anti-human and antisocial factors. We are to fight capitalism and not the capitalists. We are to wipe out this ism from human society because this ism is paralysing humanity. The capitalists are suffering from a sort of mental ailment, and it is our foremost duty to radically cure them by diverting their physical thirst towards psychic and spiritual pursuits.

There cannot be a socialistic government under a democratic framework. Those who speak highly of socialism from a democratic platform befool the public. It is just to circumvent the constitution and to secure public confidence that leaders speak on socialism and promise to establish a socialistic pattern of society, which is nothing but an absurdity.⁽⁸⁾ These so-called leaders are nothing but socialist show-boys.⁽⁹⁾

If a particular country or district is highly industrialized, that will not help in uplifting or changing the economic standard of other parts of the world or country. Hence industry should be decentralized, but key industries should be centralized. For example, the spinning industry should be centralized, and around it there should be a weaving industry run on [the basis of] decentralization principles. Even in areas where the climate is extreme, industries such as spinning can be established through artificial vaporization. This will help to create a self-supporting economic unit, which is badly needed. The area of self-supporting economic units will increase with the increase of transportation facilities. One day this world will become one economic unit. A day may come when the whole of the planetary world will become one economic unit.⁽¹⁰⁾

Large-scale and small-scale industries should remain side by side. Key industries should be managed by the immediate government, because it is not possible to run them efficiently on a cooperative basis due to their complexities and hugeness. Small-scale industries should run on a cooperative basis, and the small industries which cannot be managed by cooperatives should be left to private enterprise. Thus: (1) small businesses should be left to individuals; (2) big industries should be owned by the immediate government; and (3) the industries in between the big and small industries should be run on a cooperative basis.⁽¹¹⁾

The central government should not control large-scale industries because this may hamper the interests of local people. Where there is a federal system of government, these industries should be controlled by the immediate government, and where there is unitary government, they should be managed by local bodies.

Industrial decentralization is only possible in a collective economic structure. No profit motive will remain in such a structure. Capitalists start industries only where the following factors are available: (1) capital; (2) labour; (3) favourable [economic] climate; and (4) a ready market for sales. They always try to lessen the cost of production, hence they will never support the principle of decentralization. In the collective economic structure the profit motive has no place – here industry is for consumption. In the collective economic structure, self-supporting economic units are to be strengthened.

It is an age of science. Science should be utilized for service and blessedness. There should be rationalization of industry – that is, an old machine should be replaced by a new and more scientific one. It is no use continuing with old and worn-out methods such as the carká [spinning wheel] in the age of radioactivity [nuclear energy] and rockets.

It is incorrect to say that rationalization is the root cause of the unemployment problem. Such propaganda is carried out by leaders having little knowledge of socio-economic philosophy. The question of unemployment arises only in the capitalistic framework where industry is for profit. In the collective economic structure, where industry stands for consumption and not for profit, the question of unemployment does not arise. Here the number of labourers will not be lessened; rather the working hours will be reduced and the remaining hours will be used in mental and spiritual pursuits. The reduction in the working hours depends not only on yield, but on the demand for commodities and the availability of labour.

In industry labourers should be provided with incentives by starting and increasing the scope of piece-work and the bonus system of work.⁽¹²⁾ The right of management by labourers in factory affairs should be clearly accepted. These two factors will increase the out-turn of the factory, because under such circumstances labourers will feel an incentive to work sincerely. Only sermonizing high-sounding texts to increase output is not sufficient. Let labourers feel that the more the factory earns a profit by increased out-turn, the more profit they will share.

Cooperative ownership cannot stand in open competition with individual enterprise. Thus it requires protective armour – that is, exemption from sales tax, duties, etc. This protection should be withdrawn slowly. Protective armour should be limited to essential commodities only. Individual enterprise should be limited to those commodities which are not essential for life, such as betel shops, tea stalls, restaurants, etc.

In society males are in an advantageous position. Due to economic dependence on men, a section of forsaken women is forced to take to the profession of prostitution. When women will enjoy economic independence and equal status in society, this practice will cease to exist. Society will have to offer honourable positions to those women who give up this nasty business and rectify their character. Prostitution has a socio-economic cause.

The dowry system is based on two factors: the economic predominance of either men or women in the society, and the disproportionate number of females or males. In Burma [Myanmar] females were economically independent, so males had to pay a dowry at the time of their wedding. In the Punjab the number of males was more than the number of females, hence there was no problem of the dowry system and widow marriage. These social injustices can be removed by allowing economic independence to women, and by encouraging inter-caste and international marriages. Such a movement is urgently required at present.

It has become a fashion today to cry for peace. But the preachers of peace propagate the gospel of peace and keep their powder dry. Will their vocal mission be successful? No, never. Peace is a relative term. It is the result of fight.

When the static force becomes predominant there will be peace, which is termed tamoguńii shánti [static peace]. When the sentient force dominates there will also be peace, which is called sáttvikii shánti [sentient peace]. This fight between the static and sentient forces will continue as long as the universe exists. There cannot be any absolute peace in the realm of relativity. Absolute peace may shower down in an individual’s life, but not on the collective body. When individual animation is suspended in Cosmic animation, or when individual aspiration is suspended in Cosmic aspiration, the result is absolute peace. Absolute peace in the collective body means the suspension of the universe, which is an impossibility. Hence, to cry for peace [avoiding fight] is hypocrisy.

The craze for peace may be accepted as a diplomatic policy, but it cannot be accepted as a principle. Fight is the essence of life, and peace can be restored only after fight. Thus, in case of any invasion, if the leaders of the invaded country are really keen to establish peace, they should fight against the imperialistic motive of the invading country.

Pardoning is an individual attribute. It can be practised in individual life only, but it cannot be part of collective sádhaná. Those who poke their noses into collective affairs, or pardon people ignoring the harm they inflicted on the collective body, commit a social crime. Mahatma Gandhi should not have pressed one government to pay fifty crores of rupees to another government against the interests and sentiments of the people of that country.⁽¹³⁾

It is wrong to believe that the rapid increase in the population will in any way affect the collective economic structure. Today capitalists are trying to check the growth of the population by propagating the practice of birth control, because increases in the population will be detrimental to capitalism. In a collective economic structure one need not support birth control. Rather, the growth of the population will be helpful in the production of essential commodities. In the scientific age one tablet will be sufficient for a complete meal. So we are not to fear the increase of the population.⁽¹⁴⁾

Death means want of parallelism between physical and psychic waves. Physical waves change due to old age and disease, while mental waves change due to crude or subtle thinking. In case of the detachment of physical waves, a dead person may get his or her life back with the help of scientific processes, but this is not possible in the case of psychic detachment. This is because in such a case, even if parallel mental waves are created afresh by scientific processes, person X and not person Y will regain life. If the length of the wave becomes infinite (a straight line) due to spiritual sádhaná, one will merge into Parama Puruśa.

A time will come when the mind will be created in laboratories. Children will be sold in laboratories. Human progress is natural progress. When laboratory babes will be produced, nature will slowly snatch away the child-producing capacity of men and women. There will be no fathers and mothers. The whole social order will be changed. The reproductive urge in human beings will be utilized in higher and subtler pursuits. Those laboratory boys and girls will be more mentally and spiritually developed than the mortals of the present day.

A correct philosophy and a correct method of sádhaná are the panacea for all physical, metaphysical and spiritual diseases. In remoulding the social order, politicians will be of no practical value.

In all walks of present-day life, the dark shadows of immorality are fast taking definite shape and hampering human progress. A very strong moral force is required to wipe out this filth of immorality. One cannot expect this moral force from the government power functioning within a democratic structure. We expect it from non-political ends. The government, be it fascist, imperialist, republican, dictatorial, bureaucratic or democratic, is sure to become tyrannical if there is no moral force to check the capricious activities of the leaders or of the party in power. Immoral activities from the side of the government give rise to mass upsurge.

Middle-class people, with their developed intellect excited by pecuniary troubles, take the leading part in such a mass upheaval against the reign of terror, and finally a change in the sceptre is effected by this politically conscious sector of society. Under the democratic set-up, the middle-class people who function as a part of the government find it very difficult to raise a voice of active protest. They are the silent sufferers, getting no recognition for their sufferings. This is the greatest drawback of the democratic system of government.

The annals of human civilization say that the downfall of a particular government becomes inevitable if it goes against the collective interests of the middle-class people. In an educationally backward country, where the mass is not politically conscious, the talk and practice of adult franchise corrupts the governmental machinery. The government proves hostile to the interests of the middle-class people because hypocritical leaders cannot purchase their votes or befool them with high-sounding assurances. The corrupt leaders apply all their cunningness to purchase votes from the backward people. The more cunning the candidates are, the more successful they become. Hence the formation of a politically-conscious group, or better still a politically-educated group, is essential in every country to check the corruption prevalent among political leaders.

The world is moving very fast, and at every step the necessity of such a group is very strongly felt. Youths form an important part of the so-called politically-educated group, and the student community is a distinguished section of it. Deficiencies in the political structure cause deterioration in the educational system, and thus adversely affect the future of these students. Governments, being the economic force behind the universities, compel the universities to play the pitiable role of “Your most obedient servant”. The sole purpose of forming Proutist organizations is to put a moral check on the immoral practices in our individual and collective lives.

The present-day politicians misguide students for their own selfish ends. Certain sections of students have become puppets in their hands. They have lost their originality, and hence are unable to work as a moral check. You Proutists should work as a non-political group strictly adhering to the principles of Yama and Niyama.

Those who have a correct philosophy and a correct spiritual sádhaná based on the principles of Yama and Niyama will be the guiding personalities in the society of tomorrow. It is the duty of conscious people to snatch away the physical power and the intellectual leadership from the hands of political hypocrites. Politicians are of no use to society because they are engaged in the business of mudslinging and nothing else.

If sadvipras [spiritual revolutionaries who follow Yama and Niyama] get active mass support, revolution is bound to come. In case a government adopts the ideals of Prout, the rule of sadvipras will prevail. If the same is not adopted by the government, a physical revolution is sure to come, and ultimately power will be transferred to the sadvipras.

The motive of the politicians is only to capture power. They befool the public with high-sounding words. Therefore it is necessary that the public should be politically educated, because in that case politicians will not be able to cheat them. The time is sure to come when all their cheating tactics will fail to produce any effect, and the public will snatch away their mask of social service. At present the general mass is not politically conscious. The intelligentsia exploit their ignorance. It is the duty of Proutists to challenge this so-called intelligentsia.

There should be a world militia, but the numerical strength of the military is to be gradually reduced. Even after the formation of the world government, intra-unit and inter-unit conflicts will not cease to exist. Therefore the military requirement will remain forever. The creation is the result of fight between Vidyá [introversial force] and Avidyá [extroversial force], hence the military will be an indispensable item for the society.

In democratic countries the party in power tries to propagate their party ideals through the educational system. They prescribe only those text books which coincide with their party ideals. The universities are forced to surrender before the government because of their financial dependency. The Proutist movement will have to make the universities and educational institutions free from dirty party politics, otherwise the educational system will go on changing according to the rise or fall of different party governments. The duty of the government is to finance the universities and not to interfere in their internal affairs. The broadcasting system, too, should be free from government control.

For a good and healthy society there should be good, healthy and well-educated citizens. Politicians are unable to rectify the defects of the present society. Their course of action is detrimental to the growth of a healthy society.

There are several forms of governmental structure, and among them the democratic structure is highly appreciated [by some persons]. Democracy is defined as “government of the people, by the people and for the people.”⁽¹⁵⁾ But in fact it is the rule of the majority. Hence democracy means “mobocracy” because the government in a democratic structure is guided by mob psychology. The majority of the society are fools; wise people are always in a minority. Thus, finally democracy is nothing but “foolocracy”.

In the democratic framework of society the government may be very keen to pass laws to check corruption, but the government is not equally keen to enforce those laws, because the leaders have to depend upon the votes collected through the media of influential antisocial elements. There are three important methods to check corruption: (1) the humane approach; (2) violence; and (3) strict laws; but in a democratic society we cannot get the third item fully, and there is no scope for the second item within a democratic structure.

The best form of government is the [benevolent] dictatorship of the sadvipras. The sadvipras will elect a dictatorial board, and that board will elect ministers and a chairperson. The chairperson will be the constitutional head. If the chairperson cannot carry out his or her duties efficiently, the board will replace him or her by electing another chairperson. As a principle, individual dictatorship cannot be accepted.

The sadvipras will select good persons to carry out the executive duties in the governmental and non-governmental spheres. They will also nominate top-ranking officials. The board will have power to dismiss them if they are found unfit for any responsibility.⁽¹⁶⁾ The synthetic portion of the government will be electional and the analytic portion will be selectional. The synthetic portion will dictate policy matters and the analytic portion will execute the accepted policy. Thus our socio-economico-political structure will be selecto-electional.

The sadvipras will capture power either by intellectual revolution or by mobilizing the mass. The duty of Proutists will be to help sadvipras to become powerful and to strengthen their hands by mobilizing the mass. Renaissance Universal will carry on intellectual and moralistic propaganda.

A socio-economic ideal can be established by either of the following two methods: (1) intellectual revolution; (2) physical revolution.

Intellectual revolution stands for the propagation of ideals, but to materialize these ideals takes a pretty long time. Suffering humanity is not going to wait for this. Intellectual revolution is possible in theory only.

When the hopes and aspirations of a group of people – a majority or a minority – are not fulfilled in a democratic framework, a non-democratic or sanguinary revolution is sure to take place. Such a revolution, although undesirable, is inevitable and irresistible.

Physical revolution denotes fight against all factors which go against the principle of public welfare. The Proutists will inaugurate a new era of revolution against all sorts of fissiparous tendencies and social evils. If a country’s laws are not strong enough to rectify the conduct of immoralists, the Proutists will do something concrete.

The locus standi of a nation depends on the following factors: (1) common history; (2) common tradition; (3) common territory; (4) race; (5) [common] faith; (6) [common] language; (7) [common] sentiments; and (8) common ideals. Among these factors items one to seven are relative factors and as such are of a transitory nature only. Within the scope of item eight there can be a blending of absolute with relativity.

The absolute factor is the ideal of Cosmic ownership. (The universe is a creation of Brahma [the Supreme Entity] and as such the ownership of the universe is with Brahma. We may enjoy and utilize the objects created by Brahma, but we cannot declare that any item is mine. Everything is our common patrimony.) We are to accept this factor within the scope of relativities. Not only will the common spiritual factor unify the inhabitants of multilingual or multi-regional countries; the entire universal society will come under the banner of this common spiritual ideal and become one.

As intellectual revolution is of a democratic nature, Proutists are to make people conscious of their rights and demands. [This can be done by:]

1. Starting study circles and popularizing [ideological] literature. This is the first phase of intellectual propaganda. It stands for ideological education.

2. Platform propaganda and mobilizing the mass. This is for ideological consciousness because the mass can never be ideologically educated.

3. The Proutists supporting the sadvipras in democratic fights (that is, helping them in occupying seats in parliament, assemblies, local self-governments, cooperative societies, etc.)

In the first phase, one item; in the second phase, two items; and in the third phase, three items.

Unless [the benevolent] dictatorship [of the sadvipras] is established, socialization is not possible. Socialization cannot thrive in a democratic framework.

The universe is just like a joint family. Peace and tranquillity depend upon a well-knit socio-economic structure. The moulding of the socio-economic structure depends upon ideological outlook. First we should have a constructive ideal. The ideal should be not only the culminating point but also the starting point, which will always be supplying us with vital juice.

We want a Cosmic society, a Cosmic tie of fraternity. Now, for the sake of Cosmic fraternity, we should encourage all common factors and discourage all fissiparous tendencies. Regarding local variations, we should keep mum.

The universal society has only one culture. It has humanitarian value at its very fundament. Human society throughout the universe has only one human sentiment, and that sentiment makes people laugh in happiness and shed tears in sorrow. They try to help others, form society, live peacefully and die peacefully. This is what is called human culture. We should encourage this fundamental culture. It is a connecting link between one person and another, between so-called nation and nation. The self-dividing tendency is the creation of persons with vested interests. They are the demons of society. They are polished satans and warmongers. We will have to start a ceaseless and pactless fight against their activities.

For the sake of the solidarity of the Cosmic society, we are to start an economic structure based on common human factors and common necessities. The first and foremost factor for a sound economic structure is that:

1. The minimum necessities of human society should be guaranteed. We are not only to recognize these requirements, but also to guarantee the availability of the requirements, which includes our social responsibility of supplying individuals with purchasing power.

For a well-knit socio-economic order we require a few other factors too. They are:

2. A common philosophy of life. People unite on a common ideology. Unless the inhabitants of this vast planetary world accept one vital ideology, there is little chance of social synthesis. In the absence of such an ideology, quarrels among the members are inevitable. Hence a common philosophy is essential.

Among all the crude and subtle philosophies of life, only one philosophy rests on the Absolute, and other philosophies depend on relative factors. Among the different schools of philosophy, the cruder the philosophy, the weaker the social cohesion. When people unite for a subtle motive, the philosophy becomes subtler and subtler, and the social ties become stronger. When this subtlety reaches absoluteness, it becomes permanent.

The absolute philosophy is the philosophy dealing with Brahmavidyá [intuitional science]. It does not come within the scope of physical and relative philosophy. As far as the permanent peace and tranquillity of this planetary world is concerned, we should have a strong philosophy based on the Cosmic ideal, Brahmavidyá.

3. Universality in constitutional structure. Laws were framed by kings and leaders of different countries on the basis of their local traditions and sentiments. So really speaking law is an offshoot of feelings of virtue and vice and is a by-product of religious faith. The applied value of virtue and vice should be properly assessed, and laws should be framed on that fundament. For the entire universe we are to propose universal law.

There should be little difference among cardinal law, moral law and human law. Cardinal law means universally-accepted law, and its scope should be increased. We should have nothing to do with feelings of virtue and vice; or we may say that feelings of virtue and vice should not depend upon religious feelings but on universal acceptance. We should judge virtue and vice from the welfare angle of vision. Ours should be a never-ending process of minimizing the differences among these three [types of] laws. For the entire universal structure, law should be one.⁽¹⁷⁾

4. Common penal code. The penal code should also be prepared on the basis of a constitutional structure. The constitution should serve as the fundament for developing a penal code.

The term “guaranteed availability” [in 1. above] deserves special mention. To give incentives to intellectuals we are to provide them with certain special amenities of life. A day will come when these special amenities will not be required, as a result of continued spiritual practices. The minimum requirements are to be guaranteed to all. Each and every human being requires clothes, medicine, housing accommodation, proper education, food for proper nourishment, etc. These demands must be fulfilled. Intellectuals, scientists and people performing special services require certain amenities. Ours will be a never-ending process to minimize the gap between these two, but as a result of minimization it will never come to zero. For example, in the present circumstances every person requires a bicycle. But leaders and intellectuals will require motor cars, and we are to guarantee these as special amenities. But after that our endeavour will be to guarantee one car per capita to the public, and at that time it will be noticed that the leaders and intellectuals require an aeroplane, and so on. So we see that the gap between the minimum necessities and the special amenities will never come to an end. Ours will be a never-ending fight to minimize the gap between the two.

The per capita income of the universe will never be uniform. The gap will remain unbridged forever. Diversity is the law of nature. If the diversity ceases to exist, the universe will also cease to exist. It is an impossibility to do away with difference. But it is part and parcel of our dharma sádhaná to minimize the difference in the socio-economic sphere of life.

In the economic structure of the society, the purchasing power of the people plays the most important role in their all-round physical welfare. During the period of Shayesta Khan in Bengal,⁽¹⁸⁾ rice was sold at the rate of two annas per maund [approximately twelve-and-a-half paise per forty kilos], but people were starving. It was only because there was no purchasing capacity among the people.

Liberty: Every living creature should have liberty in certain spheres of life freedom in certain spheres of life. But that liberty must not be allowed to surmount the common cause, particularly in the physical sphere. We have no right to go against the collective interest. Liberty should be drastically and mercilessly curtailed in the physical sphere, but there should be freedom in the psychic and spiritual strata, such as freedom of thought and speech, and freedom in spiritual practice.

The scope of the limitation on individual liberty should be demarcated on the principles of pápa and puńya. These have a cardinal significance. Pápa means “to go against the collective interest”, and puńya means “helping the society and accelerating the collective progress”. Here the shloka of Vyasa may be accepted as the standard:

(1) In the Dáyabhága system the heirs’ right of inheritance is subject to the discretion of the father, who enjoys the right to disinherit any of the heirs.
For a more detailed discussion of the author’s views on inheritance, see the chapter “Ideal System of Inheritance”, Caryácarya Part 1, 1956.
–Eds.

(2) Elsewhere the author has said: “Parama Puruśa [Supreme Consciousness] is my Father, Paramá Prakrti [Supreme Operative Principle] is my Mother, and the universe is my homeland. We are all citizens of this universe.” (“Problems of the Day”, section 1.) –Eds.

(4) “Prout” is an acronym for Progressive Utilization Theory, the socio-economic theory propounded by the author. Proutists are those who support the progressive utilization of all factors. –Eds. [This footnote deleted from the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(5) Yama and Niyama are the cardinal principles of human morality. See A Guide to Human Conduct, 1957 [in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article, “ ‘The Place of Sadvipras in the Samája Cakra’ or A Guide to Human Conduct, 1957”], by the author. –Eds.

(6) Ahiḿsá and non-violence are not synonymous. Ahiḿsá means “not to harm anybody” while non-violence means “non-application of force”. The equivalent Sanskrit word for violence is cańd́aniiti, and for non-violence, acańd́aniiti.

(7) Sádhaná literally means “sustained effort”. “Spiritual sádhaná” refers to the sustained spiritual effort, through meditation or spiritual practices, required to achieve oneness with the Supreme Entity. It usually implies the effort of an individual. “Collective sádhaná” refers to collective spiritual effort, while dharma sádhaná refers to a spiritual way of life. –Eds.

(8) At the time of independence, India adopted a democratic constitution which was based on the Westminster model. Socialism was incompatible with the democratic ideals enshrined in this constitution. –Eds.

(9) Here the author is criticizing the hypocrisy of some well-known politicians who led India after independence. (A famous British thinker coined the phrase “socialist show-boy” to denounce India’s most prominent exponent of a socialistic pattern of society.) –Eds.

(10) For further discussion on socio-economic units, see “Socio-Economic Groupifications” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(11) For further discussion on cooperatives, see “Agrarian Revolution” in Volume 2, “Farmers’ Cooperatives” in Volume 3, and “Cooperatives” and “Cooperative Production” in Volume 4. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(12) In the piece-work system labourers receive the profit or part of the profit from each item they produce. The more labourers produce, the greater their income.
In the bonus system the bonus is calculated on the basis of the time saved in the production of commodities. The money value of this calculation is given to the labourers.
–Eds.

(13) When India gained independence, the leaders of Pakistan demanded fifty crores of rupees (500 million rupees) from the Indian government. Mahatma Gandhi insisted that this amount be paid to Pakistan. –Eds.

(14) For further discussion on population growth, see “Population Growth and Control” in Volume 3. -Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(15) Theodore Parker, in a speech at an anti-slavery convention in Boston on 29 May 1850 (Discourses of Slavery, 1863), defined democracy as “...a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people.” Over a decade later on 19 November 1863 Abraham Lincoln echoed this sentiment in a speech at Gettysburg (Speeches and Letters, 1907), when he said that “...government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(16) For further discussion on sadvipra boards, see “Sadvipra Boards” in Volume 2. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(17) For a discussion on a global constitution, see “Requirements of an Ideal Constitution” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(18) For further discussion on minimum requirements and special amenities, see “Minimum Requirements and Maximum Amenities” in Volume 4. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(19) The Mughal ruler Shayesta Khan was the military governor of Bengal for approximately twenty-five years in the second half of the seventeenth century. –Eds.

To the Patriots

Published in:
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]
Supreme Expression Volume 2 [a compilation]
To the Patriots

Notes:

This discourse was the Presidential Address to the history section of the Progressive Writers’ Conference held at Jamalpur on 1 January 1960.

This discourse was formerly in Prout in a Nutshell Part 4.

Dedication
To the memory of Sudha Ranjan,
Sahus Tank, Muzaffarpur
–Shrii Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar
[Dedication not included in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 4, 1st
edition, publication of this discourse.]

There are numerous divergent views regarding the exact interpretation of the term “nation”. Some are of the opinion that the inhabitants of a particular state form a nation. Even if the terms “state” and “country” are taken to be synonymous, the controversy over “nation” does not end. Some people hold the view that the structure of a nation depends on language. Others are of the opinion that the foundation of a nation depends on one or more than one factor from among the following: similar manners and customs, similar mode of living, similar traditions, racial similarity, religious similarity, etc. But practical experience does not indicate that these factors are especially important.

Indians, Pakistanis and Burmese were once the indigenous population of the same political unit, the country of India, but they failed to constitute a nation.

Linguistic similarity is not an essential factor in forming a nation. If it had been, the English-speaking people of America would not have formed a separate American nation in cooperation with the French- and Spanish-speaking people, outside the British empire. If language were the only basis of forming a nation, Switzerland would have split up into three or four parts. The German-speaking people would have wanted to merge their area into Germany, separating it from Switzerland, and would have taken pride in introducing themselves as members of the German nation. Similarly, the French- and Italian-speaking people would have wanted to annex their areas to France and Italy. But this did not happen. The Swiss are a nation with four official languages: German, French, Italian and Romansch. Likewise, the French-speaking people of Belgium prefer to look upon themselves as a Belgian nation and not as a French nation.

Only recently the people of West Bengal expressed their eagerness to reside in India as Indian nationals, and the people of East Bengal supported Pakistan and declared themselves Pakistanis, though both of them spoke the same language – Bengali. They did not demand an independent Bengalistan on the basis of the Bengali language; no, they did not even like to introduce themselves as Bengali nationals. The common people did not attach any importance to the Suharwardy-Sarat Bose formula of Bengalistan (United Socialist Bengal).⁽¹⁾

There is little difference between Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking people regarding manners and customs. Concerning language, there is very little difference between Spanish and Portuguese. The manners and customs in almost all the countries of Western Europe are practically the same; still they are not one nation. In the past, to save the prestige of their respective nations, they fought many sanguinary battles among themselves. On the other hand, the Welsh-speaking people take pride in calling themselves British, though their language, and manners and customs are quite different. The mode of living all over Europe is almost the same, and we find the same thing throughout South Asia (including India and Pakistan), but no one could form a compact nation on the basis of that factor.

The inhabitants of Bengal have an identical tradition; so do the people of the Punjab. There is no difference of tradition between the Jews and the Muslims of Arabia. Still, neither the Bengalees, nor the Punjabis, nor the Jews and the Muslims of Arabia together, could form a nation. Rather, much blood has been shed among them on the basis of religion.

There are no racial differences among the inhabitants of Iberia, nor among the Scandinavians, yet they are divided into different nations. The tie of blood could not unite them. Therefore, efforts to establish a nation on the basis of race or blood relations will not always be effective.

If religion had been the only basis for forming a nation, there could not have been more than six or seven nations in the world. Most of Europe, on the whole, would have been divided into two nations – Catholics and Protestants. But this has not happened.

How, then, is a nation formed? In reality, a kind of sentiment created either directly or indirectly on the basis of one or more factors such as country, language, religion, etc., plays a vital role in forming a nation. The factors themselves are quite insignificant. It is the sentiment and nothing else that creates a nation.

Let us see if there was such a sentiment at any time in India. That is, let us see whether or not there ever was something in India that could be called a nation.

In olden times, when the Aryans came to India, there was no compact social order in the land of India. The population of India consisted of small or big tribes of Austric, Dravidian and Mongolian origin. An absolutely different race (Caucasian Aryans) [Mediterranean Aryans from Caucasia] came to India. They brought with them the Vedic lifestyle and language; and the Vedic administration, social order and methods of warfare. They began to use the derogatory word Anárya [non-Aryan] for all the indigenous people of India. Slowly India was divided into two clearly different mental structures. One was the sentiment born of the vanity of the victorious Aryans, and the other was the sentiment created by the inferiority complex of the vanquished non-Aryans. Thus, two nations were formed in India – the Aryans and the non-Aryans.

Years rolled on. As a result of contact with the non-Aryans, the Vedic language of the Aryans underwent a change. Different regional languages came into existence. All efforts to avoid blood relations between the Aryans and the non-Aryans proved futile. Racial blending between the Aryans and the non-Aryans took place.

Gradually the non-Aryans were accepted as Shúdras or the fourth group in Aryan society, and as a result of this social blending both the Aryan sentiment and the non-Aryan sentiment lost their respective specialities. These two nations died out with the weakening of the two sentiments which had caused the formation of the Aryan and the non-Aryan nations. In other words, India again became nationless.

In this nationless age, or age of chaos, the Buddhist upheaval in India occurred. Again a section of people became united with a common sentiment – the Buddhist sentiment. They formed a new nation. In the beginning the non-Buddhists were disunited, and hence they could not form a nation. But when the Buddhists, puffed up with pelf and power, began to be unfair to the non-Buddhists with the help of the ruling authorities, an anti-Buddhist sentiment grew up among the non-Buddhists, just as an anti-Aryan sentiment had previously grown up among the non-Aryans as a reaction to the oppression by the Aryans. Towards the end of the Buddhist period, two nations, roughly speaking, were to be found in India – one based on Buddhist sentiment, and the other on anti-Buddhist sentiment.

The death of the Buddhist nation was caused on the one hand by the downfall of the bhikśus [Buddhist monks], the disorderly state of affairs in organizations and monasteries, the lack of support from the government, and above all, the want of renowned scholars among the Buddhists; and on the one hand by the support of the ruling authorities for the non-Buddhists, and the appearance of the great scholar and logician Shankaracharya. These factors brought about not only the defeat of the Buddhists, but also dissension within the Buddhist community. The new sentiment, known as the Sanátanii or Bráhmańya [Brahmanical] religion, which came into existence with the cooperation of Shankaracharya and the patronage of various non-Buddhist kings, was based on anti-Buddhist feelings. This is why, after the death of the Buddhist nation, the Brahmanical nation could not last long. Again India became nationless.

In the Post-Vedic Age, when both the Aryan and the non-Aryan nations died, no foreign invasion took place. Within the country, the Buddhist revolution occurred. Had a foreign invasion taken place, the nationless India would have been very easily conquered by the invaders. But as ill luck would have it, when India became nationless for the second time after the demise of the Buddhist and the Brahmanical nations, there was no internal revolution. Instead there was the Muslim invasion from outside.

The Muslims were able to conquer India only when Buddhism completely disappeared and shortly thereafter the Brahmanical nation also died. They were not able to conquer India before that. They had to wait for a long time after the invasion of Sind.⁽²⁾ Although the Brahmanical nation had split up in South India also, the newly-formed small nations were not weak, and that is why they were able to resist the Muslim invasion in that part of India.

After the Muslim occupation, a new Muslim nation came into being. The Muslims had their own language (formerly Turkish and later Persian), manners and customs, dress, racial peculiarity, mode of living and religion, and on the basis of these factors a sentiment developed. Their sentiment was the sentiment of the ruling people.

It is no use denying the fact that the victorious Muslim nation played the role of oppressor and did much injustice to the inhabitants of India, as was done by the Aryans to the non-Aryans, by the Brahmanical nation to the Buddhists, and by the Buddhists to the non-Buddhists. The oppression and injustice done by the Muslims made the non-Muslims unite anew – an anti-Muslim sentiment grew among them. Thus two nations were formed – the victorious Muslim sentiment based on the Persian language created one nation, while the Hindu sentiment based on the Sanskrit language created another. These two nations existed for a long time side by side in India.

The sentiment with which the Muslim nation started was entirely new, but the Hindus or non-Muslims had no equally strong sentiment, and therefore they had to form a strong anti-Muslim sentiment. Just as the leaders of the Brahmanical nation had to use the anti-Buddhist sentiment as their only capital, the leaders of the Hindu nation made the anti-Muslim sentiment their capital.

The Hindus started doing the complete opposite of what the Muslims would do. While offering prayers the Muslims would not wear their káchá;⁽³⁾ therefore the Hindus would wear it. Beef and fowl were favourite foods of the Muslims; so they were inedible to the Hindus. The Muslims would pray facing the west; therefore the Hindus were forbidden to do this. There were many things like this. I cannot say that these types of dos and don’ts were harmful to the Hindus. By means of these social directives a strong anti-Muslim sentiment was formed among the Hindus, as a result of which a Hindu nation was formed. Otherwise it would have been impossible for the non-Muslims of that age to maintain their independent existence.

As we have seen in the case of the Aryans and the non-Aryans, two nations living side by side cannot maintain their independent sentiment for long; the same thing applied in the case of the Hindu and Muslim nations. Persian, the language of the Muslims, was a completely foreign language, while Prákrta, the language of the Hindus, was born in the soil of India. Therefore, the Muslims of the capital [the area in and around Delhi] developed the Urdu language – a blending of eastern Punjabi [or Hariyánavii] of the [Demi-Shaorasenii] Prákrta language, or western Hindi, with Persian. Through this the national sentiment of the Muslims was weakened. They had to make an adjustment with the Hindus. Innumerable Persian words found a place in other languages of the Hindus, which resulted in the development of Bengali, Maethilii, Assamese, Bhojpuri, Gujarati, Punjabi and other languages which are common languages of Hindus and Muslims. Muslim scholars began to learn Sanskrit in order to be well-acquainted with India. The Hindus began to learn Urdu and Persian. The Hindus began to use Muslim dress (páyjámá and sheroyánii), while the Muslims began to use Hindu dress (dhoti and cádar). The Muslims began to use the Hindu titles Choudhury, Mandal, etc., while the Hindus began to use the Muslim titles Mullick, Khan, Sarkar and Mazumdar. The Hindus offered shirńii [a mixture of banana, sugar and milk] at the Dargah of Pirsaheb [a sacred place of worship for the Muslims]. The Satyanáráyańa [a celebrated god] of the Hindus became the Satyapiir [a revered saint] of the Muslims.

The previous relation of the victorious Muslims with the vanquished Hindus ceased to exist. The Hindus and the Muslims began to treat each other as brothers and sisters. The Muslim sentiment of the Muslims weakened beyond expectation. With the disappearance of both sentiments, both the Hindu and Muslim nations died. India became nationless for the third time.

It was under such circumstances that the Marathas, the Rajputs and the Sikhs declared their independence. But they were also the creations of anti-Muslim sentiment. So when a Hindu-Muslim fraternity was established, the Maharashtra, Rajput or Sikh sentiment could not last long. For want of a sentiment, India was split up.⁽⁴⁾

When India had become nationless for the second time, the Muslims invaded the country. And when India had become nationless for the third time, the British incursion into India began.⁽⁵⁾ The British very easily conquered the nationless India.

The Muslims no doubt conquered India, but they looked upon it as their mother country. Nobody would say that they only exploited India as foreigners; but the case of the British was different. They came to India not to settle but to earn money.

After conquering India they started their machinery of exploitation in full swing, and formed a strong government to facilitate exploitation. They formed an English-knowing society to run the government smoothly. The exploitative machinery of the British opened the eyes of all classes of Indian people. The whole of India was united on the basis of an anti-British exploitation sentiment. This was the first time that all India had formed a nation. The English language served as the unifying link in India. English was no longer the language of the British only – it had become the lingua franca of multilingual India.

An Indian nation developed as a result of the British, though they did not intend it. India, which had been split up into hundreds of parts, became united in the form of a country or a nation, which had never occurred in the past. India, which had innumerable languages, scripts, castes, races, manners, customs, diets, dresses, etc., had no history of its own. From time immemorial India had been divided into many kingdoms. Each had its own history. Neither the Pandavas, nor Ashoka, nor Kanishka, nor Samudragupta could form one government throughout India. But the British did.

The Indian people learned a practical lesson from the national spirit of the British, and nationalism grew in them also. The Indian nation’s fight for independence against the alien British nation began.

In this fight for independence, the Indian leaders committed a blunder. They should have engaged themselves in an economic fight instead of starting a political movement. The British took advantage of this blunder of the Indian leaders. They got the opportunity to divide India into two parts. They infused in the Muslims the idea that the Hindus formed the majority, and that therefore if the British quit India the government would naturally go into the hands of the Hindus, and the Muslims of the whole of India would remain as their subjects.

This shrewd policy yielded good results. A Hindu phobia grew among the Muslims. The Muslim leaders began to propagate this Hindu phobia at the top of their voices, and as a result of this anti-Hindu sentiment created out of Hindu phobia, a Muslim nation was again born in India in this twentieth century. Directed by this Hindu phobia, they demanded a separate homeland for the Muslim nation. It was not possible for the Hindus to resist this demand for a separate homeland, because at that time no nation which could be termed a Hindu nation was formed in India. The reason for this is quite simple. Because of the numerical strength of the Hindus in India, there was no Muslim phobia among the Hindus, and for want of an anti-Muslim sentiment, no Hindu nation could be formed anew.

In the Punjab and Bengal, where the Muslims formed the majority, the case was different. If these two provinces went entirely for the Muslim homeland, the Hindu population in these areas would have to remain as subjects of the Muslims. Because of this fear the Hindus in these provinces were seized with Muslim phobia, and that is why they demanded an independent homeland for the Hindus. With the partition of India, the Punjab and Bengal were also partitioned.

Where did the mistake lie? When, as a result of anti-British sentiment, the Indian nation was formed in the nineteenth century, the then leaders of India should have started a struggle for economic independence instead of launching a political movement. All Indians could have fought together unitedly, there being no Hindu, Muslim, Punjabi or Marathi feelings in this economic struggle, and as a result an anti-exploitation sentiment could have been developed in India. This sentiment could have made Indians stronger. If there had been no fight for political independence, the fear that the Muslims would have to remain under the suzerainty of the Hindus after the independence of India could not have crept into their minds. In the absence of Hindu phobia, there would have been no demand for the homeland of the Muslim nation, and when India would have gained economic independence, Hindus and Muslims would have lived together as brothers and sisters in undivided India. The fight for economic independence would have brought political independence also. There might have been some delay in it, but political independence would have surely come.

When the British decided to quit India under economic and political pressure, undivided India was the demand of the Hindu leaders, while the Muslim leaders demanded a Muslim homeland. There was no scope for an amicable settlement between these two demands. Therefore the British had to divide India. It mattered little whether India liked it or not.

Under such circumstances, was there any way for the leaders to avoid the partition of India? Yes, there was. Had they started a movement for economic independence instead of accepting the partition of India, it would have been possible to form a united and independent India. But neither the Hindu nor the Muslim leaders did so, for reasons best known to them. The economic struggle could not have remained confined to British exploitation only, but would have extended to the Indian exploiters (social, economic, psychological). When the British would have realized that their exploitation was not going to continue, they would have been compelled to grant political independence to India, and with political independence exploitation by the local people would have come to an end also. But the Hindu and Muslim leaders came from the bourgeois class and so they did not like this idea. They wanted liberty keeping capitalism (social, economic, psychological, etc.) alive. For this reason they accepted the political independence of divided India.

There are two more reasons why they did not want economic independence. One of these reasons was that those who were leaders in the struggle for political independence might not prove to be suitable leaders in the struggle for economic independence. Especially, the struggle for economic independence might lead to mass revolution and bloodshed at any time. And there was every possibility of young leaders appearing among the revolutionaries. The leaders did not want this. They tried to check the sanguinary revolution by preaching the theory of non-violence.

The leaders had one more weakness in this matter. Most of the leaders, both Hindu and Muslim, had grown old in the course of the political struggle. Possibly they thought that if they started a fresh fight for economic independence, and if the fight lasted a long time, the chance of controlling the government would not come to them. Perhaps with this idea in mind they gave their consent to a heinous crime such as the partition of India.

Where did the mistake lie? The factors which made Europe a country of many nations are applicable to India also. Rather, the differences which exist in India between one provincial nation and another are greater than those existing in Europe. The provincial nations have their own languages, manners, customs, mode of living, race, intonation, history and traditions. Some of them have their own scripts, almanac, dress and code of law of inheritance. The differences among the European nations are not as great. Still, in the struggle for independence, the English language and the anti-British sentiment had made India one nation. With the departure of the British there is no anti-British sentiment, and so the Indian nation has died.

Today there are only a few persons who regard themselves as Indians; some look upon themselves as Punjabis, some as Andhrites, some as Bengalees, some as Bhumihars, some as Rajputs, etc. None of them are Indians. The only connecting link which exists today is the weak tie of the English language. Those who are guided by a false sense of patriotism are trying even to do away with this language today. It is crystal-clear that with the banishment of the English language, the funeral ceremony of an Indian nation will be complete.

With the departure of the British from India – that is, with the death of the anti-British sentiment – a new sentiment should have been created, but the Indian leaders failed to do so. The Pakistani leaders did so to some extent. In the beginning they utilized anti-Hindu sentiment in place of anti-British sentiment, and later anti-Indian sentiment was created on the question of the Kashmir issue. These sentiments helped the people of Pakistan to some extent, but in India there is no sentiment at all. Like Pakistan, India had ample opportunity to utilize several sentiments, but the leaders did not use them. They roamed in the realm of imagination.

It is a matter of great regret that no effort was made to form a nation on the basis of a strong sentiment. On the contrary, the little bond of unity which existed in Indian society is going to be spoilt by the unwise actions of these leaders. The three great lapses of the present leadership which are going to destroy the unity of India are: (1) the effort to demarcate provincial boundaries on a linguistic basis; (2) the question of national language; and (3) the use of local languages as the media of instruction in higher education.

Provincial boundaries: I have already said that India is a country of many languages, religions and customs. An ordinary student of political science can easily understand that the result of giving any sentiment the opportunity to grow on the basis of these differences will be detrimental to the interests of the country. Still the leaders committed that very mistake by taking up the work of forming provinces on a linguistic basis. Today there is a tug of war among different linguistic groups on the question of who controls districts, subdivisions, police stations, and even villages. The consequences of such disputes will be extremely dangerous in a country where there is nothing that can be termed a nation. Now the day has come for the well-wishers of India to ponder over this issue.

It would have been tolerable to some extent if states could have been completely formed on the basis of language within a very short span of time, but even that was not done. Of course, it is not possible to accurately ascertain the boundaries of provinces on a linguistic basis; that is, everywhere there will be some bilingual or trilingual areas. Even then, what could have been done on a linguistic basis has not been done by the leaders. The result is that linguistic minorities all over India are suffering from a complex of despair. Really speaking, it was improper for the leaders to raise the question of the formation of states on the basis of language.

Some time ago, in a certain state, some leaders stated that the boundary commission⁽⁶⁾ had not done them justice, hence they would dissociate from India. Just see the condition of the so-called Indian nation!

National language: A great folly has been committed by raising the controversial issue of national language. It has not added to the growth of unity; on the contrary, it has increased disunity.

Some people have been thinking of introducing one script throughout the whole of India. Is this practical or desirable? Have they forgotten the consequences of the attempt to introduce Urdu script throughout the whole of Pakistan? What to speak of India, a land where the national sentiment has not yet crystallized!

India has many scripts. Many of these scripts are very old. From time immemorial Sanskrit, the common property of India, has been written in different scripts. Sanskrit has no script of its own. Though the Indian alphabetical order is scientific with regard to phonetics, the scripts are not scientific in the practical field. Even though Roman script is the most scientific script, I do not think that it is desirable to impose this script on the living languages of India which have a developed literature. It is, however, not disadvantageous to use the Roman script for those languages which have practically no literature at all (such as Konkani, Santhali, Khasia, etc.), or for those which are not spoken languages (such as Sanskrit and Pali). The interests of the languages which have a rich literature (such as Bengali, Hindi, Tamil and Gujarati) will be greatly affected if the Roman script is imposed on them, because by doing so the link between the past literature and the future literature will be cut off.

In this connection we should remember that at the time when Kamal Pasa of Turkey introduced Roman script for Turkish in place of Arabic, or at the time when Nagri script was introduced for the Marathi language in place of Moŕi, these languages had very poor literature. It will be extremely harmful today for either Turkish or Marathi if they change their script [again]. However, the decision whether a change in script is desirable or not should be left to the free will of the people speaking the particular language.

In this regard there is another big problem. Of the Indian languages, Bengali and Urdu are both Indian and Pakistani languages, so to change the script for either entire language is beyond the jurisdiction of either India or Pakistan. If throughout India only Bengali or Urdu script is used, while Pakistan does not accept this, the problem will not be solved. If the scripts of these languages are changed in either state, the languages will be harmed enormously. People do not like to see their mother tongue harmed. If it is they will revolt, which is what happened in East Pakistan when an attempt was made to impose Urdu script on Bengali. Is it wise to implement a policy which has the potential to foment trouble in future? Let the leaders come down from the realm of imagination to the hard reality of the earth. The soil of reality is very hard – very merciless.

Higher education: Today local languages are being used as the media of instruction in higher education. During the British regime in India, English was the medium of instruction in colleges and universities. Students of any province could get higher education in any university of India. As a result of the close association of students, a spirit of all-India fraternity developed among them. But nowadays the opportunities for interprovincial contact are rapidly decreasing as a result of the acceptance of local languages as the media of higher education. Possibilities for the growth of the spirit of fraternity among Indians are dwindling day by day. In most cases students remain confined to their provinces, and provincialism will gradually crop up as a result of want of an all-India sentiment.

What is to be done now? The leaders should totally forget the question of organizing states on the basis of language and instead take up the task of reorganizing the states entirely on the basis of economics. In all spheres of life, along with English, maximum facilities are to be also afforded to each and every language of India, in their respective regions as the official language, and as the medium of public contact. There should not be any tendency to suppress anybody. If equal facilities are afforded to all in the matter of language, nobody will think of forming states on a linguistic basis.

A strong Indian nation of the future may, however, review the issue and come to a decision according to the demands of the changed circumstances; the present leaders need not bother about this issue at all. Also, they need not bother about the necessity or otherwise of having any other language as the national language in place of English. First let them form a strong nation on the basis of a strong sentiment. The Indian nation of the future will take the responsibility for arriving at a decision on national language. It is not the proper occasion to waste time and energy on this sort of issue, creating regional controversies. No nation exists now!

India, the land of many nations, is just like a joint family full of internal dissension. Although it is not possible for these nations to form one nation through their joint efforts, they can live together amicably as a joint family by forming a group of nations (a compact multinational unit) based on one ideology. It is to be remembered that the solidarity of a joint family cannot be maintained if activities are always determined by counting votes. In that case those who are defeated will quit the joint family – that is, it will be ruined.

A joint family is nurtured by the goodwill of each of its members (in the present case, of each of the nations of India). It is a matter of great regret that there is a dearth of this goodwill in India today. Even powerful leaders are looking after the interests of their own nations (the basis being language, states, communalism or casteism as the case may be), instead of thinking of the interests of India as a whole. None of these leaders are the leaders of India; they are all the leaders of their own nations. The interests of others are not safe in their hands.

It is proper that English should continue as the medium of instruction in colleges and universities. Question papers, too, should be in English. But students should have the right to answer according to their convenience – in English or in any other language or languages approved by the university. In this respect, the greater the number of languages approved by the university, the better. The students taking final school examinations should be also given the right to give answers in English or in other approved languages. The media of instruction should be English and other approved languages, and the question papers should be printed in the approved languages also. Students may feel inconvenience if the medium of instruction is English only or if the question papers are in English only. Still, English must be an approved language, otherwise it will be almost impossible for students coming from distant provinces to get an education when their mother languages are not included in the schedule of approved languages.

All these suggestions are efforts to help check the fissiparous tendencies that exist in India. But we require something more as a nation-building element. What more should present-day India do towards the formation of a nation or a group of nations?

Most of the people of India are poverty-stricken. They want to get rid of exploitation. Political independence has no value for them if it cannot give them economic independence. I have heard many poor villagers say, “Can we not cast our votes in the box marked for the British? We will do that. Their government was good.” These remarks certainly do not add to the glory of the present leadership. If a strong nation or group of nations is to be built, a fight against exploitation will have to be launched. Only high-sounding talks of socialism, a socialistic pattern, or a welfare state will not yield any result. No sentiment is growing in the minds of the people as a result of these slogans. Unless a strong sentiment is created, a nation or a group of nations cannot be formed. The government gets hardly any support or cooperation from the people in its welfare work for want of a sentiment among the people.

India has had many opportunities to create sentiments, and even today they exist, but in the interests of world fraternity one may not support them. If an anti-exploitation sentiment is created among the poverty-stricken mass of India, not only will a strong nation or a strong group of nations be formed, but this nation or group of nations will continue with due solidarity for a long time. The leaders should, therefore, rectify the errors of the past and vigorously launch a fresh anti-exploitation campaign. There is no other alternative to save India.

But will the leaders be able or willing to do this? If they are, it is well and good. If they are not, perhaps they will try to unite the people forcibly through the pressure of governmental machinery. But will this be possible? The different characteristics of the peculiar land of India cannot be pounded into dust by the steamroller of governmental machinery, and such unity is not at all desirable. The more the steamroller is used, the greater the dissatisfaction among the people will be. If anything is to be done by force, the condition of India will become like that of the Balkan states. The whole of India will be split up into innumerable states, big and small. Innumerable nations, big and small, will fight among themselves. So it seems that the present leaders need to retire in the interests of India.

I find it necessary to say one more thing in this connection. Those who think that the Bhúdán and Sarvodaya movements⁽⁷⁾ are a fight against exploitation are mistaken. Rather, these movements very carefully avoid an anti-exploitation campaign. They will only be advantageous to the capitalists because the fighting spirit of the people is tactfully suppressed.

Politics is neither my hobby nor my profession. I am a student of history. I feel it my duty to draw the dreadful picture which I visualize about India, otherwise future historians will not forgive us. The highest responsibility in this respect, however, rests with the leaders of the country. They can save or sabotage the country.

To save India the present leaders should immediately chalk out a policy to convert the people of India into a strong nation or a strong group of nations. Any pretext or jugglery of words in this matter will be fatal to the cause of the country. If the leaders do not do this, I am afraid the political unity and geographical integrity of India will be affected at any moment; especially when there are fissiparous tendencies active in the country. We should not forget that in the past it was the want of unity which brought India under the yoke of slavery time and again. If there is lack of unity at present, it should be understood that India has become intellectually bankrupt.

I am an optimist. I hope that the leaders will realize their mistakes and will face reality with courage. If they fail to do so, India will create new leaders in the future, and those future leaders will save India from destruction. India will not die.

Today the primary duty of the common people of India is to rectify the errors committed by the leaders and unite India through an anti-exploitation campaign. India has got to be saved. This anti-exploitation campaign will not only unite India, but also India with Pakistan and with each of the poor and backward countries of Southeast Asia. A strong nation or group of nations will thereby grow up. It matters little what name is given to that nation or that group of nations.

It is through this anti-exploitation movement that Russia, the country of many nations, was united. This movement has made China a strong state. The nations in the capitalist countries are not united on the basis of this anti-exploitation sentiment. Their unity is based on some other sentiments. They have, however, maintained their unity by clearly recognizing their internal diversities. The leaders of India should study the conditions of such nations with due care.

Although the anti-exploitation sentiment is the most important factor in building a nation or a group of nations, this sentiment will not be able to sustain a nation or a group of nations for a long time. One day exploitation must cease. If it is not stopped completely, it can be confidently said that in the future the intensity of exploitation will be much less than what it is today. As soon as administrative power passes into the hands of moralists, then exploitation will cease to exist. In the absence of exploitation the anti-exploitation sentiment will die out, and consequently a nation or a group of nations based on the anti-exploitation sentiment will not exist either.

What will happen then? The sentiment of spiritual inheritance and Cosmic ideology will keep people united. It is true that this spiritual sentiment will not help to form a nation inside any particular country, but it will definitely unite the entire planetary world, and even the universe, into a nation. Then there will be only one nation – a universal nation.

Today human beings, to whatever country they may belong, should, on the one side, propagate an anti-exploitation sentiment (exploitation does not mean exploitation in the economic sphere only, it includes all sorts of exploitation), and form strong nations in their respective countries; and, on the other side, preach the theory of one spiritual inheritance – that every living being is the child of the Supreme Entity, and that all the people of all nations belong to the same family. This will have to be explained to all, that there will be clash among different nations as long as national feelings exist. People may talk of disarmament, but military preparation will go on underground. And if people dedicate themselves to the welfare of the entire human race, their respective nations will also be benefited indirectly because their nations are not outside the universe!

Along with the theory of spiritual inheritance, one Cosmic ideology will have to be propagated too, and that ideology is that one Supreme Entity – the Cosmic Entity – is the goal of all living beings. This spiritual sentiment will keep human beings united for all time to come. No other theory can save the human race.

(1) Bengal was partitioned for the second time when India gained independence from the British. Dr. Suharwardy and Sarat Bose, prominent Muslim and Hindu leaders respectively, proposed the formation of a United Socialist Bengal to counter the threat of partition. The proposal was subsequently rejected by their respective political parties, and Bengal was partitioned in 1947. –Eds.

(2) Sind was captured for the first time by the Muslims in 712, but the first major Muslim invasion of India took place at the end of the twelfth century, after which the Muslims established their rule in India. –Eds.

(3) North Indian Hindu males usually wear a dhoti (lower-body garment), which is tied around the waist. The káchá refers to the custom of tucking one corner of the dhoti behind the body between the lower back and the portion of the dhoti tied around the waist. This is done so that the dhoti does not touch the ground. –Eds.

(4) This process had commenced by the beginning of the eighteenth century. –Eds.

(5) By the middle of the eighteenth century, the British had established a powerful military presence in India. (After the Carnatic Wars and the Battle of Plassey, the British had become the supreme military authority in the country.) –Eds.

(6) The boundary commission was instituted shortly after India gained independence to settle boundary disputes among the provinces. –Eds.

(7) In the Bhúdán movement launched by Vinoba Bhave and the Sarvodaya movement started by Jayprakash Narayan, an attempt was made to convince landlords to donate land to poor, landless people. (Bhú means “land” and dán means “donate”; sarva means “all” and udaya means “rise”.) –Eds.

The Responsibility of Society

Published in:
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]

Notes:

this version: is the printed Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5, 2nd edition, version (obvious spelling, punctuation and typographical mistakes only may have been corrected). I.e., this is the most up-to-date version as of the present Electronic Edition.

This discourse was formerly in Prout in a Nutshell Part 21.

The essence of the parallel psychic waves of society is determined by the medium [average degree] of the following factors: 1) a common language; 2) similar manners and customs; 3) a similar mode of living; 4) similar traditions; 5) racial similarity; 6) religious similarity; 7) a common culture; and 8) a common objective or goal. Unfortunately, these factors are generally neglected at the time of building a social structure because they are not the causes of the collective psychology but the means through which the collective psychology flows. In actual fact a common sentiment, common psychic waves, form the essential vital force of a social structure. This is the reason we say that society is the expression of parallel psychic waves, and arises because of the mental tendency of moving in unison.

It is clear that society is supported by the immense collective power of many individuals. This is why the popular concept of society is that of a collection of individuals. But a mere aggregate of many individuals whose psychic waves move in different directions, that is, whose psychic waves are not parallel but divergent and distorted by dissension, cannot be called a society.

In a family, where each individual gives importance to the comforts and well-being of the other members, however physically or intellectually underdeveloped they may be, we see a society in miniature. There are many families in the world where every member is concerned about the welfare of the others, despite differences in their physical or intellectual capacity. This is an ideal family. This should also be the ideal form of society, although this is extremely rare today.

Society has a responsibility to maintain and utilize its common property in a proper way. Society should ensure that all are given equal usufructuary rights to this property so that everyone can live together with a healthy body and mind.

Today the world is following either capitalism or extreme materialism [i.e., communism]. Under these systems, those who are endowed with greater knowledge, intellect or physical power go on misappropriating more and more material wealth. People have forgotten that together with physical wealth we also receive subtle wealth from Prakrti [the Supreme Operative Principle]. A member of a family who does not feel a sense of unity with the other family members and does not recognize the logically-acceptable necessity and the lofty principle of joint rights, cannot be regarded as a social being. According to a universal spiritual ideology, the system of individual ownership cannot be regarded as absolute. This is why our [Ananda Marga’s] concept of society does not support capitalism.

In a joint family every member satisfies his or her desires and need for food, clothing, medical treatment and other requirements according to the financial capacity of the family. If a certain member of the family accumulates more food, clothes, books or medicine than he or she needs, will the other members of the family not face difficulty? In such circumstances that person’s actions will be unrighteous and detrimental to society. It is the responsibility of society to immediately dismantle such a defective social system.

In the world today the capitalists are accumulating an increasing amount of wealth and possessions, leaving others to suffer acute pangs of hunger. They are forcing people to wear rags so that they can parade in ostentatious clothing. To increase their strength, they are even sucking others dry of their vital juice. It is the responsibility of society to use all possible means to make these people understand their mistakes and stop their antisocial activities.

The aspiration to become rich by exploiting others is always a kind of psychic ailment. Capitalists argue, “We amass wealth through our intellect and labour. Let others also amass wealth in the same way if they have the intellect or capacity to work. Who will stop them?” They do not want to accept that the number of consumable commodities in the world is limited, but all need their basic necessities. If one person is rolling in wealth this will generally mean that others will be deprived of even their minimum requirements. The failure to recognize the needs of others is itself a disease. But the victims of this ailment are also our brothers and sisters, members of the same human family. Either through human appeals or circumstantial pressure, these people must be cured of their psychic ailment. In order to do this we will have to channelize their obsession with material wealth in a mental and spiritual direction. At the same time as people’s physical hunger and thirst are being satisfied, everyone should be freely taught scientific processes to fulfil their psych[o-spiritual] longings.

There should be a social order in which every one will work according to his or her capacity. Those with greater physical capacity will provide physical labour, and those with greater psychic capacity will provide psychic labour. It is the responsibility of society to look after those who are unable to render either physical or psychic labour.

Society should not grant social rights only to those who have the physical capacity to work. All should have equal rights; and the rights of one individual should not violate the rights of others. Everybody should be guaranteed the inviolable right to develop themselves psychically and spiritually to the best of their capacity. There should be no obstructions of any kind. But in order to preserve social peace and joy, the individual right to go against the collective interest in the physical sphere must be withdrawn.

When building a social structure we should give the highest priority to the spiritual goal. Everybody will have to realize this. Even if they expand psychically, people become self-centred if they lack a spiritual goal, and group sentiments develop in their minds. Such people cultivate mundane knowledge but not spirituality. Spirituality involves the contemplation of such questions as “Who am I?”, “What is my goal?”, “How can I reach my goal?”, etc. Today’s intellectuals are impeding the spread of spirituality because they are morally deficient and their psychic waves are going against the collective interest. As a result, immorality, corruption and dishonesty are rampant in society. A strong and healthy society will stop this trend.

A study of history will make it clear that a strong and healthy society has not yet evolved on this planet. This is mainly due to the inadequate propagation of an ideology. Although at different times a few people thought of establishing a strong and healthy society, they used argument and debate instead of deliberation and reason to convince others of the need for such a society, and ultimately ended up projecting themselves instead of the ideology. Thus the ideology became secondary and was ultimately swept away because people started worshipping them as mahátmas [elevated souls] or mahápuruśas [spiritual beings]. Due to the absence of an ideology a strong society could not be established, and many defects crept into individual life.

Lord Krśńa was the first to attempt to build a strong and healthy society, but he lost a lot of time due to the Mahábhárata war. Ultimately he did not have enough time to build a human society. Similarly, Lord Sadáshiva, the original propounder of Tantra,⁽¹⁾ had to devote much of his time to building a strong foundation for spirituality, and despite his immense desire, he could not build a strong social order. Today, the combined power of both will help to build a healthy human society.

(1) For further discussion on Tantra, see Discourses on Tantra Volume 1, 1993, and Volume 2, 1994. –Eds.

Social Defects in Gandhism

Published in:
Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]

Notes:

This discourse was formerly in Prout in a Nutshell Part 21.

Society is a collective entity; it does not belong to any individual. The goal of society is to continuously promote the collective welfare. When individuals realize the imperative need to sacrifice for the collective interest, then and only then is it possible to establish a strong and healthy society.

Now the question is, what should be the relationship between individuals and society? Every individual possesses two invaluable and extraordinary potentialities: psychic and spiritual. The collective body cannot issue dictates concerning these two potentialities – its jurisdiction is limited to physical wealth only. In the physical sphere if individuals do not violate the interests of the collective body, both society and the individual will avoid difficulties and enjoy a state of well-being. For this reason the individual right to go against the interests of the collective has been withdrawn. But in the psychic and spiritual spheres, every individual has complete freedom to advance and progress.

From this perspective Marxism is irrational, unnatural and unscientific. Even if the mundane wealth of the universe is properly distributed, people will not be satisfied. A cry will ring out from the depths of their hearts, “I long for more. I long for more.” This is because the desires of the human mind are limitless. These unlimited desires can only be satisfied in the sphere of the infinite. It is not possible to satisfy infinite longings in the physical sphere, because although the amount of physical wealth is extremely vast, it is not infinite. That is why wise people channelize their unfulfilled infinite longings towards the psychic and spiritual spheres.

In Gandhism we find two defects: psychological and material. Although Gandhism is not pure capitalism, it undoubtedly protects capitalism. Capitalists find complete protection in this system. Gandhism claims that the capitalists are the trustees of the people, but how is that possible? Can those who thrive on human blood be the protectors of the people? How can the exploited masses believe that their exploiters will be their saviours? We can therefore see that Gandhism directly contradicts psychology.

Secondly, Gandhism always tries to avoid fight and every type of struggle, including class struggle. According to Marxism, there are two main classes: the exploiters and the exploited. Gandhism does not recognize this sort of division. The fact is that of the four classes in society – the shúdras, kśattriyas, vipras and vaeshyas – the dominant or ruling class exploits the other classes to the best of its capacity. Although the period of exploitation may be short or long depending upon the inherent strength or vitality of the ruling class, the order of mundane advancement follows this pattern. According to Gandhism, it is possible to transform exploiters through persuasion. Theoretically this view may be acceptable, but it is neither natural nor practical. If a goat tries to persuade a tiger, won’t the tiger eat the goat? Struggle is natural and indispensable. Tantra⁽¹⁾ also supports the idea that progress is achieved through struggle. The denial of struggle is a capitalist-serving [i.e., material] defect.

According to Ananda Marga, if persuasion fails it is essential to apply force. In the final analysis we can say that the golden rule is: “Protect the virtuous; punish the wicked.” A human society can only develop if this principle is followed.

Only to those who aspire to realize Parama Puruśa [Supreme Consciousness] and are free from selfishness may be entrusted the guardianship of society. Only those who are established in Yama and Niyama⁽²⁾ and who have accepted Brahma [the Supreme Entity] as the goal of their life are capable of safeguarding the interests of the human race. Such people alone are sadvipras and only they can represent humanity – they alone can serve all creation selflessly. Sadvipras will be identified by their conduct, their commitment to service, their dutifulness and their strength of character. Only they will firmly proclaim, “All human beings belong to one race! All have equal rights! All are members of the same human family!” Only these sadvipras can warn the exploiters in a thunderous voice: “No exploitation of one person by another! No exploitation in the name of religion!” Such sadvipras will become the guardians of society. Sadvipras will never stop the ongoing class struggle which manifests according to the laws of the samája cakra [social cycle]. They will only ensure that the rulers do not exploit society; thus they will rule the rulers.

The propounder of Gandhism was a man of humble temperament who did not like conflict, but this is unnatural and impractical. A principle can only be accepted if it is practical. Practicality does not come from mere idealism.

(1) For further discussion on Tantra, see Discourses on Tantra Volume 1, 1993, and Volume 2, 1994. –Eds.

(2) Yama and Niyama are the cardinal principles of human morality. See “The Place of Sadvipras in the Samája Cakra”, or A Guide to Human Conduct, 1957. –Eds.

Glossary

Notes:

[To see if this Glossary is now available online, click Online additional information or click the link at the bottom of this page. (If you have opened this page under Books on the home page, first reopen it under Discourses on the home page.)]


Chapter 1	Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]


Chapter 2	Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]


Chapter 3	Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]


Chapter 4	Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]


Chapter 5	Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]


Chapter 6	Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]


Chapter 7	Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 5 [a compilation]